High frequency of BRCA1/2 germline mutations in 42 Belgian families with a small number of symptomatic subjects

AIM: The initial risk assessments for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and estimates of carrier frequencies were based on extended pedigrees with a large number of symptomatic subjects. When counselling based on BRCA gene mutation analysis was initiated, we faced requests for counselling mostly from members of small families with only two or three affected members. We report on the likelihood of finding a BRCA mutation in such small families. METHODS: In the first 100 families that came for oncogenetic counselling since September 1994, a BRCA1/2 gene mutation screen was initiated if there were two or more symptomatic first degree relatives, if one of them had ovarian cancer, or if one breast cancer was diagnosed before the age of 50 years. RESULTS: BRCA gene mutations were found and confirmed by sequencing in 14 out of 42 families (33%); 10 mutations were in the BRCA1 gene and four in the BRCA2 gene. Our findings indicate an increased probability of detecting a BRCA gene mutation when ovarian cancer occurred in the family. There is no increased probability of detecting a mutation with increasing numbers of breast cancers. Only 22% of the eligible presymptomatic family members opted for testing. The presymptomatic female carriers currently prefer breast surveillance rather than prophylactic surgery. CONCLUSION: BRCA1/2 gene mutation testing can be done with reasonable efficiency in the Belgian population when there are two symptomatic family members. The availability of testing does not lead to a high frequency of requests for testing by presymptomatic family members.     

Marker segregation information in breast/ovarian cancer genetic counseling: Is it still useful?

The use of mutation screening of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes as a genetic test is still to a certain extent limited and the oncogeneticist may want to use complementary approaches to identify at-risk individuals. In a series of 23 families with at least three breast or ovarian cancer cases, screened for mutations at BRCA1 and BRCA2 and typed for markers at both loci, we investigated the usefulness of marker segregation information at two levels: 1) to what extent can the indirect approach identify the mutation carrier status of screened cases and their first-degree relatives, and 2) in what way does it help to identify the gene implicated in a family in which neither BRCA1 nor BRCA2 mutation has been detected? Using the indirect approach, the carrier status of the screened case could be determined with quasi certainty in three families and with a high probability in eight families. This status could be inferred in unaffected first-degree relatives as almost certain in one family and as highly probable in six families. Fourteen mutations were found concurrently in our series. Among the nine mutation-negative families, we were able to conclude that a BRCA1 mutation most probably segregated in one and that a mutation other than BRCA1 and BRCA2 was probably involved in two families. Our results show that, in small families, little help is to be expected from linkage data and mutation screening is the only way of identifying the origin of a genetic predisposition in a family. Marker segregation information may be useful in some large breast/ovarian cancer families in which no BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation has been detected. Am. J. Med. Genet. 79: 175–183, 1998. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 in the Province of Ontario

In 2001, genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 was introduced in Ontario, for women at high‐risk of breast or ovarian cancer. To date over 30,000 individuals have been tested throughout Ontario. Testing was offered to all Ontario residents who were eligible under any of 13 criteria. We report the results of tests conducted at Mount Sinai Hospital from 2007 to 2014. A total of 4726 individuals were tested, 764 (16.2%) were found to carry a pathogenic variant (mutation). Among 3684 women and men who underwent testing without a known familial BRCA mutation, 331 (9.0%) were found to carry a mutation. Among 1042 women and men tested for a known family mutation, 433 (41.6%) were positive. There were 603 female mutation carriers, of these, 303 were affected with breast or ovarian cancer (50%) and 16 with another cancer (2.3%). Of 284 unaffected female carriers, 242 (85%) were tested for a known family mutation and 42 (15%) were the first person in the family to be tested. By placing greater emphasis on recruiting unaffected female relatives of known mutation carriers for testing, greater than one‐half of newly identified carriers will be unaffected.     

Probability of BRCA1/2 mutation varies with ovarian histology: results from screening 442 ovarian cancer families

While there are many reports in the literature of mutation testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in breast/ovarian cancer families, the question of which type of ovarian cancers are relevant still pertains. We have undertaken whole gene screening including multiple ligation-dependent probe amplification in an affected individual within 442 unrelated non-Jewish families containing at least one reported ovarian cancer diagnosed less than 50 years or at any age with family history of breast or ovarian cancer for mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. A total of 166 mutations were identified 110 (25%) in BRCA1 and 56 (13%) in BRCA2 . In families without confirmation of ovarian diagnosis, the detection rate drops significantly. In families fulfilling Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium (BCLC) criteria with confirmed ovarian cancer cases, the mutation detection frequency was 80%. If only BCLC families with unconfirmed ovarian cancers were included, the detection rate dropped to 36% when a relevant ovarian cancer diagnosis was not confirmed. In BCLC families containing only one ovarian cancer, BRCA2 accounted for 45% of identified mutations. No mutations were identified in affected individuals with borderline or mucinous tumours. Detection rates dropped below the 10/20% international thresholds in a number of families with unconfirmed ovarian cancers. Borderline/mucinous pathology substantially reduces the likelihood of identifying a BRCA1/2 mutation. Strenuous efforts should be made to confirm ovarian pathology if the lack of confirmation or refuting the diagnosis would decrease a family's likelihood of mutation detection below screening thresholds. In the UK, a higher proportion of families harbour BRCA2 pathogenic mutations than predicted from previous studies.     

Clinical,pathological and genetic features of women at high familial risk of breast cancer undergoing prophylactic mastectomy

Prophylactic mastectomy (PM) is a risk-management option for women at high familial risk of breast cancer (BC). This study describes the PM experience of women enrolled in a large observational cohort study involving families with a history of hereditary breast cancer. Within 357 multiple-case BC families [119 (33%) BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation positive], identified via family cancer clinics, 49 cases of PM [21 (43%) BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation positive] were identified and their clinical, pathological and genetic features reviewed. Families with at least one incidence of PM displayed stronger breast/ovarian cancer histories than did families without PM. Median age at time of PM was 45 years (range 28-58). Ten cases (21%) were bilateral PMs in unaffected women and 39 cases were contralateral PMs in women with prior invasive BC (71%) or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (8%). Most (88%) underwent total mastectomy. Unnecessary axillary surgery occurred in eight subjects (16%). Malignant histology was found in three PM specimens (6%). Prior to genetic testing, PM was performed in two women who were subsequently shown not to carry the mutation specific to their family. Optimal utilization of genetic testing to guide surgical decision making, appropriate surgical technique and careful pathology examination of PM specimens, are important issues to consider prior to PM in women at high familial risk of BC.     

BRCA1/2 testing: uptake, phenocopies, and strategies to improve detection rates in initially negative families

Fischer C, Engel C, Sutter C, Zachariae S, Schmutzler R, Meindl A, Heidemann S, Grimm T, Goecke TO, Debatin I, Horn D, Wieacker P, Gadzicki D, Becker K, Schäfer D, Stock F, Voigtländer T, on behalf of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. BRCA1/2 testing: uptake, phenocopies, and strategies to improve detection rates in initially negative families. In families with clustering of breast and ovarian cancer, molecular testing of the major susceptibility genes BRCA1/2 helps to identify patients with disease mutations and healthy persons at high risk who can participate in targeted intervention programs. We investigated 5559 families from the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer included between 1997 and 2008 and treated under clinical routine conditions. In each family an index patient/person had been screened for deleterious mutations in BRCA1/2. Healthy relatives agreed to predictive testing in 888 of 1520 BRCA1/2 mutation‐positive families (58%). Of 2646 eligible unaffected first‐degree relatives 1143 decided to be tested (43%). In 325 families with BRCA1/2‐positive index patients one related BC/OC patient was tested and 39 (12.0%; 95% confidence interval: 8.7–16.0%) discrepant cases found. A second related individual was screened in 163 of 3388 (4.9%) families with BRCA1/2‐negative index patient and in eight families a BRCA1/2 mutation was found. In BRCA1/2 mutation‐positive families, BC/OC patients lacking the familial mutation have to be expected at a rather high rate. In families with BRCA1/2‐negative index patient we recommend a second screening if another patient with a high probability of carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation is available.     

Prevalence of founder mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes among unaffected women from the Bahamas

Population‐based testing for BRCA1/2 mutations detects a high proportion of carriers not identified by cancer family history‐based testing. We sought to determine whether population‐based testing is an effective approach to genetic testing in the Bahamas, where 23% of women with breast cancer carry one of seven founder mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene. We determined the prevalence of founder BRCA mutations in 1847 Bahamian women without a personal history of breast or ovarian cancer, unselected for age or family history. We found that 2.8% (20/705) of unaffected women with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer and 0.09% (1/1089) of unaffected women without a family history carry a BRCA mutation. A total of 38% of unaffected women with a known mutation in the family were found to carry the familial mutation. We previously suggested that all Bahamian women with breast or ovarian cancer be offered genetic testing. These current data suggest that additionally all unaffected Bahamian women with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer should be offered genetic testing for the founder BRCA mutations.     

Comparison of individuals opting for BRCA1/2 or HNPCC genetic susceptibility testing with regard to coping, illness perceptions, illness experiences, family system characteristics and hereditary cancer distress

OBJECTIVE: To study differences between individuals opting for genetic cancer susceptibility testing of a known familial BRCA1/2 and HNPCC related germline mutation. METHODS: Coping, illness perceptions, experiences with cancer in relatives and family system characteristics were assessed in 271 applicants for genetic testing before test result disclosure. Hereditary cancer distress, worry and cancer risk perception were assessed before, 1 week after, and 6 months after disclosure. RESULTS: Individuals from BRCA1/2 and HNPCC mutation families did not differ with regard to the number of experiences with cancer in relatives, grief symptoms, the course of cancer distress, worry and risk perception through time and most illness perceptions, coping responses and family characteristics. Individuals from BRCA1/2 families perceived hereditary cancer as more serious. They reported more frequently a passive coping style, cancer worry and a less open communication with their partner and children. CONCLUSION: Besides subtle differences, psychological mechanisms may be mainly identical in individuals opting for BRCA1/2 and HNPCC susceptibility testing. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Based on our findings, using a similar counseling approach for individuals opting for BRCA1/2 or HNPCC genetic susceptibility testing is justified. In this approach, attention should be directed more to individual aspects than to the type of disorder.     

Strategies for recruitment of relatives of BRCA mutation carriers to a genetic testing program in the Bahamas

The prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations among unselected breast cancer patients in the Bahamas is 23%. It is beneficial to advise relatives of mutation carriers that they are candidates for genetic testing. Women who test positive are then eligible for preventive interventions, such as oophorectomy. It is not clear how often relatives of women with a mutation in the Bahamas wish to undergo genetic testing for the family mutation. Furthermore, it is not clear how best to communicate this sensitive information to relatives in order to maximize patient compliance. We offered genetic testing to 202 first‐degree relatives of 58 mutation carriers. Of 159 women who were contacted by the proband or other family member, only 14 made an appointment for genetic testing (9%). In contrast, among 32 relatives who were contacted directly by the genetic counselor, 27 came for an appointment (84%). This study suggests that for recruitment of relatives in the Bahamas, direct contact by counselor is preferable to using the proband as an intermediary.     

Application of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier prediction models in breast and/or ovarian cancer families of French Canadian descent

The BRCAPRO, Couch, Myriad I and II, Ontario Family History Assessment Tool (FHAT), and Manchester models have been used to predict BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carrier status of women at high risk for developing the heritable form of breast and ovarian cancers. We have evaluated these models for their accuracy in classifying 224 French Canadian families with at least three cases of breast cancer (diagnosed before the age of 65 years), ovarian cancer, or male breast cancer where mutation status was known for an index affected case used to assess the model. This series includes 44 BRCA1 and 52 BRCA2 mutation-positive families. Using receiver operator characteristics analyses, the C-statistics were found to be 0.81, 0.80, 0.79, and 0.74 for the BRCAPRO, FHAT, Manchester, and Myriad II models, respectively, when incorporating both BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carrier predictions. For the BRCAPRO model, 75% scored greater than a 0.43 probability in the mutation-positive group and 75% scored less than 0.50 in the mutation-negative group. Only 38 of 128 (30%) mutation-negative group had a probability greater than 0.43 with the BRCAPRO model. While all models were highly predictive of carrier status, the BRCAPRO model was the most accurate where a cut-off of 10% would have eliminated 60 of 128 (47%) mutation-negative families for genetic testing and only miss 10 of 96 (10%) mutation-positive families. A review of the cancer phenotypes with high BRCAPRO probabilities showed that significantly more metachronous bilateral breast cancer cases occurred in BRCA1/2 mutation carrier families in comparison to mutation-negative families, a feature which is not discriminated in the BRCAPRO model.     

Contribution of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations to breast cancer in Tunisia

Hereditary breast cancer accounts for 3–8% of all breast cancers, with mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes responsible for up to 30% of these. To investigate the prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations in breast cancer patients with affected relatives in Tunisia, we studied 36 patients who had at least one first degree relative with breast and/or ovarian cancer Thirty-four 34 patients were suggestive of the BRCA1 mutation and two were suggestive of the BRCA2 mutation, based on the presence of male breast cancer detected in their corresponding pedigrees. Four mutations in BRCA1 were detected, including a novel frame-shift mutation (c.211dupA) in two unrelated patients and three other frameshift mutations – c.4041delAG, c.2551delG and c.5266dupC. Our study is the first to describe the c.5266dupC mutation in a non-Jewish Ashkenazi population. Two frameshift mutations (c.1309del4 and c.5682insA) were observed in BRCA2. Nineteen percent (7/36) of the familial cases had deleterious mutations of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. Almost all patients with deleterious mutations of BRCA1 reported a family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer in the index case or in their relatives. Our data are the first to contribute to information on the mutation spectrum of BRCA genes in Tunisia, and we give a recommendation for improving clinical genetic testing policy.     

Risk factors for detecting germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 founder mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish women with breast or ovarian cancer

We ascertained 184 Ashkenazi Jewish women with breast/ovarian cancer (171 breast and 13 ovarian cancers, two of the former also had ovarian cancer) in a self-referral study. They were tested for germline founder mutations in BRCA1 (185delAG, 5382insC, 188del11) and BRCA2 (6174delT). Personal/family histories were correlated with mutation status. Logistic regression was used to develop a model to predict those breast cancer cases likely to be germline BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers in this population. The most important factors were age at diagnosis, personal/family history of ovarian cancer, or breast cancer diagnosed before 60 years in a first degree relative. A total of 15.8% of breast cancer cases, one of 13 ovarian cancer cases (7.7%), and both cases with ovarian and breast cancer carried one of the founder mutations. Age at diagnosis in carriers (44.6 years) was significantly lower than in non-carriers (52.1 years) (p<0.001), and was slightly lower in BRCA1 than BRCA2 carriers. Thirty three percent of carriers had no family history of breast or ovarian cancer in first or second degree relatives. Conversely, 12% of non-mutation carriers had strong family histories, with both a first and a second degree relative diagnosed with breast or ovarian cancer. The predicted values from the logistic model can be used to define criteria for identifying Ashkenazi Jewish women with breast cancer who are at high risk of carrying BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations. The following criteria would identify those at approximately 10% risk: (1) breast cancer <50 years, (2) breast cancer <60 years with a first degree relative with breast cancer <60 years, or (3) breast cancer <70 years and a first or second degree relative with ovarian cancer.     

中国上海家族性乳腺癌BRCA1和BRCA2基因的突变

目的研究上海地区家族性乳腺癌中BRCA1／BRCA2基因的突变位点及携带情况。方法研究对象来自35个汉族家族性乳腺癌家系，家系中至少有一个一级亲属乳腺癌患病史。共35例患者，其中13例发病年龄≤加岁。由静脉血提取基因组DNA，对BRCA1／BRCA2基因的全部编码序列进行扩增。扩增产物突变分析先由变性高效液相色谱分析进行筛查，之后进行DNA直接测序证实。结果在BRCA1基因中发现有4个突变位点，其中2个为新发现位点——拼接点突变（IVS17-1G〉T；IVS21＋1G〉C）；另两个为已报道的致病突变位点——移码突变（1100delAT；5640delA）。BRCA2基因的1个致病突变位点位于11号外显子上，为移码突变（5802delAATT）。另外，共发现有12个新的单核苷重复多态位点，都未引起氨基酸编码改变；其中，8个在BRCA1基因上，4个在BRCA2基因上。在家族性乳腺癌中，BRCA1突变频率（11．4％）高于BRCA2基因（2．9％）。结论新发现的2个BRCA1基因的拼接点突变可能是中国上海人群家族性乳腺癌的特有突变位点；在我国上海地区人群中，BRCA1基因突变起着比BRCA2基因更大的作用；该研究丰富了中国人群中BRCA基因的突变谱，并为未来的临床基因检测提供了筛查模式。     

Hereditary breast/ovarian cancer – pitfalls in genetic counseling

Genetic counseling and risk assessment, given to women with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer, are regularly based on pedigree analysis. In the Ashkenazi Jewish population, hereditary breast/ovarian cancer is mainly attributed to three founder mutations, namely, 185delAG, 5382insC, and 6174delT, in BRCA1/2 genes. The overall frequency of these mutations, in the Jewish Ashkenazi population, is as high as 2.5%. Based on clinical and family history data, the results of BRCA molecular testing, in Ashkenazi individuals at risk, are appropriately anticipated in most cases. Here we report on five families, in which the segregation of BRCA1/2 mutations, in affected and unaffected family members, was unexpected, emphasizing the need to test, for founder mutations, every Ashkenazi individual at risk, irrespective of the genotype of affected family members. Ultimately, risk assessments and recommendations, in Ashkenazi women, should be invariably based on the results of genetic testing.     

Genetic testing and familial implications in breast-ovarian cancer families

DNA-testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 has become incorporated in the diagnostic procedure of patients with breast and/or ovarian cancer. Since 1994 an immense amount of information has been gathered on mutation spectra, mutation risk assessment, cancer risks for mutation carriers, factors that modify these risks, unclassified DNA variants, surveillance strategies and preventive options. For the patient and family the main determinator still is whether a mutation is found or not. When a pathogenic mutation is detected in an index case, relatives can opt for pre-symptomatic DNA testing. However in the vast majority no mutation, or only unclear mutations are detectable yet. This means that a hereditary cause cannot be excluded, but pre-symptomatic DNA-testing is still unavailable for relatives. Surveillance for both index cases and relatives is based of the family history of cancer. Next generation genetic testing may help to elucidate genetic causes in these families.     

BRCA2 mutation in Icelandic prostate cancer patients

 Molecular genetic analysis of prostate cancer has gained considerable attention in recent years. The hope is to find genetic markers that can help to determine which patients are likely to develop a progressive or lethal disease and would therefore benefit from early treatment. The BRCA2 gene on chromosome 13 has been associated with familial male and female breast cancer. A founder mutation in this gene has been detected in the Icelandic population. This is a 5-bp deletion that leads to an early termination and truncated protein. Clustering of prostate cancers in some of the Icelandic BRCA2 families implies that mutation carriers are at increased risk of developing cancer of the prostate. The aim of the study was to investigate this mutation in Icelandic prostate cancer patients related to BRCA2 positive breast cancer probands and to estimate the prevalence of this mutation in unselected prostate cancer patients. To examine the potential role of this mutation in prostate cancer we analyzed prostate cancer cases from 16 BRCA2 families and all available samples from individuals diagnosed with prostate cancer in Iceland over a period of 1 year. The risk ratio of prostate cancer was 4.6 (1.9–8.8) in first-degree relatives and 2.5 (1.2–4.6) in second-degree relatives of the 16 BRCA2 positive breast cancer probands. Of 26 prostate cancer cases found in these families 12 were analyzed, and 8 of these (66.7%) had the BRCA2 mutation. All of these patients developed an advanced disease, and all have died of prostate cancer (median survival 22.5 months). Among unselected cases 3.1% (2/65) had the mutation and developed an advanced disease as well. This specific mutation in the BRCA2 gene is found in a subset of Icelandic prostate cancer cases and appears to be a marker for poor prognosis. Received: 31 January 1997 / Accepted: 23 May 1997     

Family history as a predictor of uptake of cancer preventive procedures by women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation

Women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation are at an elevated risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer; however, it is unclear to what extent family history influences the uptake of cancer prevention options.Women with a BRCA1/2 mutation completed a follow-up questionnaire that assessed uptake of cancer preventive options. The pedigree of each woman was reviewed, and information was recorded on cancers diagnosed in relatives. Five hundred and seventeen women were included in the study. Women with a sister with breast cancer were more likely to have a prophylactic mastectomy than those without a sister with breast cancer [odds ratios (OR) = 2.4, p = 0.003]. Uptake of prophylactic mastectomy was significantly lower in women with a mother with ovarian cancer compared with those whose mother did not have ovarian cancer (OR = 0.4, p = 0.01). Having a mother or sister with ovarian cancer significantly predicted the uptake of prophylactic oophorectomy (OR = 1.6, p = 0.04). Women with a BRCA2 mutation were less likely to have a prophylactic oophorectomy than those with a BRCA1 mutation (OR = 0.49, p = 0.0004). Among women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, family history predicts the uptake of prophylactic mastectomy and prophylactic oophorectomy.     

Evaluation of two different models to predict BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a cohort of Danish hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer families

To meet the increasing demand for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation analysis, a robust system for selecting families who have a higher chance of a mutation has become important. Several models have been developed to help predict which samples are more likely to be mutation positive than others. We have undertaken a complete BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation analysis in 267 Danish families with high-risk family history. We found deleterious mutations in 28% (76) of the families, 68% (52) of those in BRCA1 and 32% (24) in BRCA2. We compared our results with two popular manual models developed to estimate the chance of a positive result. One is the recently published Manchester model and the other is the Frank 2 model updated by Myriad Genetic Laboratories, Inc. Neither of the models would have suggested screening all mutation-positive samples. The Manchester model would have suggested screening 124 of the families in the cohort, thereby detecting 54 of 76 mutations (sensitivity 71%; specificity 63%), whereas the Frank 2/Myriad model would have found 60 of 76 mutations by screening 169 samples if a 10% likelihood was adapted (sensitivity 79%; specificity 43%). The updated Manchester model suggested screening 172 families whereby 64 mutations would have been detected (sensitivity 84%; specificity 44%). We conclude that although both models would have reduced the number of samples screened significantly, up to 28% of the mutations would not have been found by applying these models to this Danish cohort of families. This raises the question whether models designed for specific populations can be used in a wider setting.     

Frequency of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a clinic-based series of breast and ovarian cancer families

Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 account for a significant proportion of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer cases. In this study, we sought to determine the frequency of BRCA1- and BRCA2-mutation carrier families in a hospital-based cancer family registry. The frequency of families with germline truncating mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 was 17.3% (18/104) and 1.9% (2/104), respectively. Two novel truncating mutations, BRCA1 1848delGA and BRCA2 5694insT, were identified. We also sought to determine the carrier frequency of other affected family members for which the mutation lineage could be established within these families. Not including the probands, 72% (18/25) of the affected family members within the BRCA1 mutation-associated families were carriers, and all four affected members of the BRCA2 families were carriers. These data imply that risk evaluation based on cancer family history alone may result in inaccurate estimates, and where possible, mutation testing should be considered in other affected family members to verify carrier status.     

An evaluation of common breast cancer gene mutations in a population of Ashkenazi Jews.

OBJECTIVES: In view of the recent reports of recurrent mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 in the Ashkenazi Jewish population, we have undertaken to assess the frequency of these mutations in this population attending for genetic counselling and risk assessment of familial breast cancer. DESIGN: Mutation screening for the 185delAG and the 5382insC mutations in BRCA1 and the 6174delT mutation in BRCA2 was performed on DNA samples from either subjects affected by breast or ovarian cancer or obligate gene carriers. The likelihood of the cancers being hereditary in each family was calculated. SUBJECTS: Blood samples were obtained from 26 affected subjects or obligate gene carriers from 23 Ashkenazi Jewish families, all with a history of either early onset breast or ovarian cancers, or multiple cases of breast or ovarian cancer. RESULTS: Twelve mutations have been identified in the 23 families (52%) of which eight (67%) were the 185delAG mutation, three (25%) were the 6174delT mutation, and one (8%) was the 5382insC mutation. While the majority of these mutations were identified in families with a greater than 50% probability of being hereditary under the CASH segregation model, three mutations were identified in families with a 35% or less probability. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic screening of the recurrent mutations in Ashkenazi Jewish families will lead to the availability of predictive testing in a reasonably large proportion, even if the family history of breast/ovarian cancer is not particularly strong. In our view it is possible to reassure high risk unaffected members of these families, if the screening is negative for these mutations, even if a sample from an affected member of the family is unavailable for previous screening.